The Problem with Principles

As I write this, people around the country, and the world, are in stunned dismay at a small group of Congressmen that took the United States to the brink of default because the President and his party refused to repeal at least part of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Had they succeeded (it now appears Congress will head off disaster at the last moment), it would have been the first time in our history that the nation defaulted, going back to Alexander Hamilton — and would have placed our economy at risk of another recession. Why did they do it? They’re standing on principles.

Meanwhile, European Union economic policymakers are leading the continent into its worst extended economic performance since governments began keeping national economic statistics. At the current rate, Europe’s recovery from the current slump, between 2007 and 2013, is behind its growth rate from 1929 to 1935 — of course, those were the years of the Great Depression. Why? Because they’re standing on principles.

As it turns out, both zealous Republicans and sober EU policymakers are standing on quite similar principles — balanced budgets, smaller government, lower taxes. As a life-long Republican (I served a political appointment in the Bush 41 administration), I’m disposed to agree with those concepts. But as a pragmatic businessman, I abhor their elevation to the status of “immutable principles.” I’m for those concepts only as long as they work to achieve the goals they’re intended to serve.The problem with tea party Republicans and EU policymakers is that they believe these concepts are immutable. They always work. They can’t be questioned. They’re the truth. They’re principles.

Men standing on principles gave us Communism and fascism, the great political and social scourges of the 20th century. They’re giving us radical Islam, the great scourge (so far) of the 21st century. No, I’m not comparing EU policymakers or tea party Republicans to Hitler, Stalin or Osama Bin Laden. Those men were evil. But the reality through history is that when men like these (and it is usually men, for what it’s worth) proclaim immutable principles, it attracts masses of misguided people who don’t want to think, who are uncomfortable with reality and all its complexity, who want absolute truths to guide them through the confusions of the real world — which does describe tea party Republicans and EU policy.

Here are some telltale signs of the problems with principles, whether in the form of political ideology, religious fundamentalism, or other rigid or extreme ideas.

You Know You’re Standing on Principles If…

People who stand rigidly on principle are never open to the possibility that they might be wrong, no matter how badly things are going on their watch.

People who stand on principle don’t seek out varying opinions from intelligent people with different experiences than their own. They demonize those who disagree with them.

People who stand on principles stop learning. I once saw a House Republican leader interviewed, and the conversation turned to Ronald Reagan. This Republican leader idolizes Reagan, has studied his career, and regularly touts his own adherence to Reagan’s conservative principles of smaller government and lower taxes. When the interviewer pointed out that Reagan had raised taxes (see around 11:00), the Republican was dumbfounded, like a deer in headlights. He actually turned to his press person, who interrupted the interview. This was information contrary to his sacred principles. He’d filtered it completely out.

People who stand on principle don’t “check their assumptions” from time to time. They don’t feel the need. When they look for evidence, it’s not to test their assumptions, but to justify their entrenched position. If things aren’t working out, it’s the fault of something else, not their principles. On the other hand, if something good happens, it’s all due to adherence to their principles. Their principles are not “falsifiable,” as good scientists put it. They can’t be disproven, in the minds of those who stand on them.

Worst of all, people who stand on principle invariably run headlong into absurdities of unanticipated consequences. Abraham Lincoln understood this: “The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.”

Did the Founding Fathers Give Us “Principles”?

Here in the US, many conservative Republicans place great emphasis on immutable principles supposedly laid down by the Founding Fathers. They insist that we must stay true to the Founders and that their principles must guide our actions. But guess what? The Founders laid down no immutable principles. They were sons of the Enlightenment, and were the ultimate experimenters. The United States in their mind was one great experiment, and everything they gave us, even the Constitution, must be amendable to change.

This applies even to the core founding concepts: equality and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” (emphasis mine)

The great scientist and experimenter, Benjamin Franklin, crossed out “sacred and undeniable” and replaced it with “self evident.” Jefferson, himself a superb, pragmatic thinker, immediately agreed, as did John Adams. Even our core founding concepts weren’t immutable. They weren’t unquestionable principles. The “truth” of even these core concepts — like everything else about the new republic — was subject to verification, testing against reality.

If you have to have a guiding principle, I’d suggest that last one, about testing principle against reality. It’s a great principle for business and the economy. And it would be a great principle for our political leaders.